Are Gamma Rays Always Part of Nuclear Reactions?

AI Thread Summary
Gamma rays do not always accompany nuclear reactions, although they are commonly produced when energy is released during decay processes. While alpha and beta decays can occur without gamma radiation, gamma rays often result from the nucleus transitioning from an excited state to a ground state after decay. The confusion arises from the fact that many reactions do emit gamma radiation due to excess energy, but this is not a universal rule. Specific examples, such as Tritium's beta decay, illustrate cases where gamma radiation is minimal or absent. Understanding the conditions under which gamma rays are emitted clarifies that they are not a guaranteed byproduct of all nuclear reactions.
frozonecom
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Making it short : Do gamma rays ALWAYS accompany a nuclear reaction??

I was thinking, since there are only three types of radioactive decay, alpha, beta and gamma. I don't quite understand how gamma radiation will always occur. Isn't it going to be just ONE of the three types?

/Help :)
 
Science news on Phys.org
frozonecom said:
Making it short : Do gamma rays ALWAYS accompany a nuclear reaction??

I was thinking, since there are only three types of radioactive decay, alpha, beta and gamma. I don't quite understand how gamma radiation will always occur. Isn't it going to be just ONE of the three types?

/Help :)

Gamma rays are (very) high energy electromagnetic radiation carrying away some of the energy produced by the decay. So just about any reaction can produce some amount of gamma radiation - all that's necessary is that the reaction release enough energy.

If you want an analogy: You can burn many different fuels in many different chemical reactions and end up with many different combustion byproducts, but you'll likely always get some amount of heat as one of the outputs.
 
Nugatory said:
Gamma rays are (very) high energy electromagnetic radiation carrying away some of the energy produced by the decay. So just about any reaction can produce some amount of gamma radiation - all that's necessary is that the reaction release enough energy.

If you want an analogy: You can burn many different fuels in many different chemical reactions and end up with many different combustion byproducts, but you'll likely always get some amount of heat as one of the outputs.

So there aren't any reaction not accompanied by the release of gamma rays? I was having a hard understanding these concepts. Thanks for replying.

EDIT: I'm asking since your word likely always was kind of vague. So, when are the times that gamma radiation will not occur?

EDIT 2: I also saw it here: http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/Radiography/Physics/gamma.htm
in the animation, it also says Gamma Decay / radiation ALMOST ALWAYS accompany alpha and beta decay. Same thing I'm not understanding: When does it not accompany nuclear decay processes?
 
Last edited:
frozonecom said:
Making it short : Do gamma rays ALWAYS accompany a nuclear reaction??

An interesting question. I want to say that no, not all nuclear reactions cause gamma rays. For example, take Tritium, the unstable isotope of Hydrogen. It decays by beta decay and is used in products like gun sights to make them glow. I don't know for sure, but I would think that there would be little to no gamma radiation, otherwise it wouldn't be a safe product.

I was thinking, since there are only three types of radioactive decay, alpha, beta and gamma. I don't quite understand how gamma radiation will always occur. Isn't it going to be just ONE of the three types?

/Help :)

There are more than three types of decay. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decay_mode#Decay_modes_in_table_form
Gamma radiation is defined as EM radiation emitted from the nucleus of an atom. An atom can easily decay and release more than one type of radiation. This can occur if the nucleus remains in an excited state after the decay, releasing a gamma ray photon when it makes the transition from the excited to the ground state.
 
^Thanks. Giving the Tritium example made me understand it better.. :)

I also searched on the Tritium case and found out that after an electron is ejected, a small difference in energy with both sides of the equation (see website) exists. I can't really explain in that well but the website kinda does a great job explaining. Here's the quote I'm saying:

As you said, the proton has slightly less mass than the neutron. The mass of the electron makes up for this somewhat, but if you do the math, you'll see that there's still some mass "missing" from the right side of the reaction. Energy takes up the slack: the electron comes out moving very fast, i.e., with lots of kinetic energy.

In other reactions, the "leftover" energy sometimes manifests itself in different ways. For example, the nucleus that comes out is sometimes in an excited state--the remaining protons and neutrons have more energy than usual. The atom eventually gets rid of this extra energy by giving off a gamma ray.


So, I kinda "get" where ALMOST ALWAYS came from. It's because the "excess" energy can be given to the ejecting particle, accelerating it, making the particle eject faster, OR the excess energy can be given off as a GAMMA RADIATION. So, there's really two possibilities, but GAMMA RADIATION happens more often.

Thanks for the help! :)

http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/isotopes/radioactive_decay.html
http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/isotopes/mass_conservation.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I need to calculate the amount of water condensed from a DX cooling coil per hour given the size of the expansion coil (the total condensing surface area), the incoming air temperature, the amount of air flow from the fan, the BTU capacity of the compressor and the incoming air humidity. There are lots of condenser calculators around but they all need the air flow and incoming and outgoing humidity and then give a total volume of condensed water but I need more than that. The size of the...
Thread 'Why work is PdV and not (P+dP)dV in an isothermal process?'
Let's say we have a cylinder of volume V1 with a frictionless movable piston and some gas trapped inside with pressure P1 and temperature T1. On top of the piston lay some small pebbles that add weight and essentially create the pressure P1. Also the system is inside a reservoir of water that keeps its temperature constant at T1. The system is in equilibrium at V1, P1, T1. Now let's say i put another very small pebble on top of the piston (0,00001kg) and after some seconds the system...

Similar threads

Back
Top